Which Leica M?
If you were to get one (1) Leica M camera, which would it be, and why?
Because that question can have as many answers and opinions as there are people here, but: I chose an M6 Classic because -
1. It has a good meter. Some may disagree, but I think it's fine. Actually, I think it's excellent for the kind of work I do. (I'm not a 35mm zoner)
2. It is still a completely mechanical camera, ultimately an M4 with a meter. M4 would have been my first choice, but after having done some research and considering the similar cost of an M4, I like the bonus of not having to estimate exposure or tolerate an awkward little hotshoe meter. I like that if batteries go out, I don't have to stop shooting.
3. MP is very expensive and I think I'd hesitate to use it and treat it the way I do my M6.
4. The M6 I have has the MP VF mod ($250 I'm told) and while I can't directly compare to one without, I think it's probably a significant improvement and one of the reasons to choose over the MP itself.
5. M3 would be nice, but I like black and black paint would be prohibitively expensive, more a collector piece than a user and again, no meter. If in-camera metering REALLY isn't important to you, than M3 or even M2 might be a nice choice.
6. Not specific to M6, or maybe even Leica, but I love shooting film with a completely manual camera. I think it was Mike Johnston (and I'm sure many others) has said: It has everything I need and nothing I don't to make pictures.
What it does have is so refined and so simply and logically put together that once one has gotten familiar with it, it really is a camera for life. It works that way in my hands and it is built that way. I could go on for pages, but in this world of disposable digital technology I love having something that feels connected to the past (camera is from 1984, but could easily be from 1948) and literally feels like it's machined from solid piece of steel. Dials and all. I rarely 'fondle' it anymore the way I did during the 'honeymoon'. It is after all just a tool, but it is a supreme tool (to parrot Leica's marketing jive; that one seems to fit). I use it now with confidence and aplomb and I think it shows in my photos. Especially the discreet street stuff, where the Leica REALLY shines.
If you are one of those that happen to be into it for the Leica status, don't do it. I only say that because enough time on the forums talking and reading about Leica and you start to think that 'cult' status is the motivation for many, if not most. In reality, VERY few people recognize it for what it is and mostly think you are some kind of an anachronism for toting around an outdated looking film camera while they sneer at you with their D3s and 5DM2s with foot long lenses. I keep to my own, private pleasure at times like that.
I won't ramble any longer now, as I'm sure I've thoroughly given my opinion with regard to your original question about a paragraph ago. All I can say is, if you enjoy the type of photography the Leica RF is best suited for, you probably won't regret any particular M model that you choose. I haven't has GAS in years now and that alone is worth something in my book. I just take pictures now.
If you were to get one (1) Leica M camera, which would it be, and why?
Because that question can have as many answers and opinions as there are people here, but: I chose an M6 Classic because -
1. It has a good meter. Some may disagree, but I think it's fine. Actually, I think it's excellent for the kind of work I do. (I'm not a 35mm zoner)
2. It is still a completely mechanical camera, ultimately an M4 with a meter. M4 would have been my first choice, but after having done some research and considering the similar cost of an M4, I like the bonus of not having to estimate exposure or tolerate an awkward little hotshoe meter. I like that if batteries go out, I don't have to stop shooting.
3. MP is very expensive and I think I'd hesitate to use it and treat it the way I do my M6.
4. The M6 I have has the MP VF mod ($250 I'm told) and while I can't directly compare to one without, I think it's probably a significant improvement and one of the reasons to choose over the MP itself.
5. M3 would be nice, but I like black and black paint would be prohibitively expensive, more a collector piece than a user and again, no meter. If in-camera metering REALLY isn't important to you, than M3 or even M2 might be a nice choice.
6. Not specific to M6, or maybe even Leica, but I love shooting film with a completely manual camera. I think it was Mike Johnston (and I'm sure many others) has said: It has everything I need and nothing I don't to make pictures.
What it does have is so refined and so simply and logically put together that once one has gotten familiar with it, it really is a camera for life. It works that way in my hands and it is built that way. I could go on for pages, but in this world of disposable digital technology I love having something that feels connected to the past (camera is from 1984, but could easily be from 1948) and literally feels like it's machined from solid piece of steel. Dials and all. I rarely 'fondle' it anymore the way I did during the 'honeymoon'. It is after all just a tool, but it is a supreme tool (to parrot Leica's marketing jive; that one seems to fit). I use it now with confidence and aplomb and I think it shows in my photos. Especially the discreet street stuff, where the Leica REALLY shines.
If you are one of those that happen to be into it for the Leica status, don't do it. I only say that because enough time on the forums talking and reading about Leica and you start to think that 'cult' status is the motivation for many, if not most. In reality, VERY few people recognize it for what it is and mostly think you are some kind of an anachronism for toting around an outdated looking film camera while they sneer at you with their D3s and 5DM2s with foot long lenses. I keep to my own, private pleasure at times like that.
I won't ramble any longer now, as I'm sure I've thoroughly given my opinion with regard to your original question about a paragraph ago. All I can say is, if you enjoy the type of photography the Leica RF is best suited for, you probably won't regret any particular M model that you choose. I haven't has GAS in years now and that alone is worth something in my book. I just take pictures now.
- Leupold Rx Ii Rangefinder User Manual Download
- Leupold Rx Ii Rangefinder User Manual Free
- Leupold Rx-750 Rangefinder User Manual
Manuals and User Guides for Leupold RX-II. We have 1 Leupold RX-II manual available for free PDF download: Operating Instructions Manual Leupold RX-II Operating Instructions Manual (40 pages). Jason covers the new Rx Full Draw range finder from Leupold. Please watch: '2015 Bow Review: Athens Solace' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v. Your RX Series rangefinder. To ensure top performance for the life of the product, please read these instructions before operating your RX-I, RX-II, RX-III, or RX-IV. Your new Leupold RX Series digital laser rangefinder is a revolutionary, range-finding device that incorporates advanced digital electronics with state-of-the-art ballistics.
Leupold Rx Ii Rangefinder User Manual Download
Leupold Rx Ii Rangefinder User Manual Free
Leupold Rx-750 Rangefinder User Manual
Reviews for Leupold RX-II Rangefinder
1. Overall I am happy with the RXII Rangefinder, as it does give the line of sight distance and the point of aim distance at the same time. Out to 300 yards this will not change enough for the magnum calibers to honestly mattert. I do wish I would have looked a bit harder to find a rangefinder that is easier to see in low light. Also the unit itself has a ton of features for bow and rifle hunters. Too many in my opinion. As a person that is 'technically challenged', prefer to aquire a target and get the range. Never claimed to be an electronic guru, and it is a bit confusing to get the proper settings. The information on the website for the settings for Bullet placement (BPX) is very limited in the choice of loads, but with a bit of long range trial and error it can be figured out. Would not want to by this a few days BEFORE the hunt for sure.
Just a few things I would look for if wanting a range finder for rifle shooting. The claimed distance is 700 yards... That is for reflective targets. I found it fairly accurate out to 500 yards on paper targets and about 340 on solid dark objects. In this case an angus bull standing in the pasture. have not tried the rain mode.. Yes, worth $200, but would prefer to pay a bit more and get more range, less features and something easier to see in low light.
2. I both bow and rifle hunt. The Leupold RX-II Rangefinder has 3 bow modes with with true range. It also has several rifle combined with cal. functions. Both bow and rifle have the true range. The Leupold RX-II Rangefinder is easy to use and easy to figure out. It comes with both a manual and the pouch has a snap or d-ring for attaching to your hydration pak. comes in handy. I bought this product brand new still in a sealed box, for $200.40. That's with shipping. This is a 6x magnification tool. All in all you can spend more if you need more. This fills the bill for me. I think if you tool up on a budget and you want quality, this is the rangefinder for you. You can find them for 200-229$ if you shop around.
3. I purchased for Antelope hunt in Wyoming. First one did not work right and was sent back for repair after the hunt. A new one was sent by Leupold. I find it very difficult to set up and get the right ballistic group. Too many features. Does not measure game out beyond about 300 yd. With a fast caliber sighted in for 200 yd I can hold on and get my game at that range. Not very useful. A Rangefinder is needed for 350+ yards and this one falls down at that range. Save your money and pay for a high quality like Leica that actually works at 400 yd on game. The side of a barn isn't a useful object to be able to range. Plus, this isn't even made by Leupold. It is a Chinese import. Bad move Leupold as it falls below their usual high standards. Bean counters must be in
charge there instead of people who actually hunt.
4. As a rule I purchase Leupold optics. I purchased this compact range finder because I wanted a compact to hunt with this fall. I already have another range finder with a 800 yard capability. This was a 750 yard and should be almost equal. It is not. I will continue to practice with this new one before I consider it to be 1/2 the other. It will not read out the distances tht the other range finder does in test side by side. To say I was disappointed would be an under statement.
Leupold RX-II Rangefinder at eBay
1. Overall I am happy with the RXII Rangefinder, as it does give the line of sight distance and the point of aim distance at the same time. Out to 300 yards this will not change enough for the magnum calibers to honestly mattert. I do wish I would have looked a bit harder to find a rangefinder that is easier to see in low light. Also the unit itself has a ton of features for bow and rifle hunters. Too many in my opinion. As a person that is 'technically challenged', prefer to aquire a target and get the range. Never claimed to be an electronic guru, and it is a bit confusing to get the proper settings. The information on the website for the settings for Bullet placement (BPX) is very limited in the choice of loads, but with a bit of long range trial and error it can be figured out. Would not want to by this a few days BEFORE the hunt for sure.
Just a few things I would look for if wanting a range finder for rifle shooting. The claimed distance is 700 yards... That is for reflective targets. I found it fairly accurate out to 500 yards on paper targets and about 340 on solid dark objects. In this case an angus bull standing in the pasture. have not tried the rain mode.. Yes, worth $200, but would prefer to pay a bit more and get more range, less features and something easier to see in low light.
2. I both bow and rifle hunt. The Leupold RX-II Rangefinder has 3 bow modes with with true range. It also has several rifle combined with cal. functions. Both bow and rifle have the true range. The Leupold RX-II Rangefinder is easy to use and easy to figure out. It comes with both a manual and the pouch has a snap or d-ring for attaching to your hydration pak. comes in handy. I bought this product brand new still in a sealed box, for $200.40. That's with shipping. This is a 6x magnification tool. All in all you can spend more if you need more. This fills the bill for me. I think if you tool up on a budget and you want quality, this is the rangefinder for you. You can find them for 200-229$ if you shop around.
3. I purchased for Antelope hunt in Wyoming. First one did not work right and was sent back for repair after the hunt. A new one was sent by Leupold. I find it very difficult to set up and get the right ballistic group. Too many features. Does not measure game out beyond about 300 yd. With a fast caliber sighted in for 200 yd I can hold on and get my game at that range. Not very useful. A Rangefinder is needed for 350+ yards and this one falls down at that range. Save your money and pay for a high quality like Leica that actually works at 400 yd on game. The side of a barn isn't a useful object to be able to range. Plus, this isn't even made by Leupold. It is a Chinese import. Bad move Leupold as it falls below their usual high standards. Bean counters must be in
charge there instead of people who actually hunt.
4. As a rule I purchase Leupold optics. I purchased this compact range finder because I wanted a compact to hunt with this fall. I already have another range finder with a 800 yard capability. This was a 750 yard and should be almost equal. It is not. I will continue to practice with this new one before I consider it to be 1/2 the other. It will not read out the distances tht the other range finder does in test side by side. To say I was disappointed would be an under statement.
Leupold RX-II Rangefinder at eBay